The Canton advocate. [volume] (Canton, D.T. [S.D.]) 1877-1897, 1887-10-13

absolute need OF SUCH, Is TOO clear to
need argument.
The advocates of admission as a
whole strive to meet and offset this
advantage by argument that the real
influence is in the popular, or lower
house of congress; that appropriation
bills all originate there, and, conse-
quently, with one large delegation we
could get more national aid; that
our influence in national conventions
would be greater. The first is sort
of statesmanlike claim; the second
purely partisan or selfish.
When we consider the fact that the
senate has the great power to check
unwise or extravagant legislation, the
advantage of having four instead of
two members in that body is clearly
apparent, and also when we further
consider that the two states would be
united on all questions which affect
improvements and for which appropri-
ations would be made, the advantages
to be gained by larger state lessen.
And, again, the influence in national
conventions would be relatively greater
from two states than from one. The
same issues would be more than likely
to control both states. Then in the
electoral college we would gain two
votes by division. It seems to me that
in a national sense our relations to the
general government would be more
powerful were we divided, and as di-
vided admitted.
/ will now briefly consider the Sec
ond proposition. 1t must be conceded
that Dakota is large enough for two
good sized states. If so, then it is
quite sure to follow that she is too
large for one state; that is, that it
would be easier to carry on success
full a state of half its size, and it has
frequently been demonstrated by fig.
ures, borrowed from statistics, that it
is cheaper in proportion. The ques-
tion of economy is a very important
one in the management and control of
states as well as lesser municipalities,
and yet it sometimes transpires that
the cheapest run state is not the best
governed. The true rule is that the
nearer the people are to the govern
ment the better the government.
AS at present constituted, this terri
tory is divided into two, and l might
say into three, distinct parts, viz:
North, South and central Dakota. It
has for the past twelve years been con-
ceded, and it came about naturally,
that institutions should be duplicated
in North and South Dakota. A peni-
tentiary is located at Bismarck and
Sioux Falls, long before there were
prisoners enough to fill one. A uni
versity at Grand Forks and Vermillion;
an insane asylum at Yankton and
and central Dakota has in
the two last sessions of the legislature
claimed university. Brookings has
an agricultural college, and Fargo, as
naturally as child, asks for dupli-
cate at that place. There is the North
Dakota territorial fair and the South
Dakota territorial fair; North
and South Dakota Pharmaceuti-
cal society; public examiner for
the north and one for the south;
and in fact the two sections
are as distinct as North and South
Carolina They have become so natu-
rally; nothing can change it. The twig
was so bent and therefore the tree is
so inclined. No number of railroads
can work change. We are, in fact,
divided; all we need is the sanction of
congress. Inevery political convention
there are recognized two factions who
are naturally as suspicious of one an
other as men with different interests
clashing can be. In the legislature it is
the same. The charge of north against
south and vice versa is the most fire.
quent of utterances. Legislation, now,
0yN xyyo icf yyyII
depend npon combinations formed by
representatives of localities wherein
these public institutions are located.
In forming combinations to assist in
carrying through appropriation bills,
they integweave important general
measuresi',which gain or suffer (gener-
ally the afatter) by the compact. AS
two states these evils would disappear.
% s;a WI nle,. central Dakota will, as her
growing imp ,rtance suggests, claim a
right to pay part in these combina-
tions. She may be let in or she may
not; it depends upon the caprice of the
extreme north and south. Should the
uOlCu uhA Souoh u1otSiSS uPoA Vic''S
appropriation bills one or the other may
enter into an alliance with her and then
she will be recognized as third dis
tinct faction, and we will then have
three states in one. There is no deny
ing these propositions; they surely ex-
list. Their existence has been brought
about naturally and they will die only
when there is legal division of this
territory.
The questions then arise: Can a
state thus internally divided be well
governed state? Can a state whose
legislation depends upon appropriation
combinations be a we'll governed state?
Can a state with three distinct classifi-
cations jealous one of the other be a
well governed state?
1t seems to me there can be but one
answer,
I believe / have given in brief, as |
am limited by space as well as time,
some very good reasons why Dakota
shOuld he divided In doing 40 / have